Recommend me a Cd player

[Sal1950]

Some are so slow to read you could go and make a cup of tea and come back before it's cued itself up.

Really? Maybe I'm lucky but I've not experienced that since my first player in the 80s?

 

[Roland68]

Really? Maybe I'm lucky but I've not experienced that since my first player in the 80s?

@Mart68 might have slightly exaggerated here, but there really are many devices that take 30–60 seconds just to load a disc, regardless of their age. This happens particularly often with SACD and multi-format players.
With some models, you also have a few extra seconds added on for a sluggish tray mechanism.

Personally, I find this annoying, which is why it’s a deal-breaker for me.
Others, however, aren't bothered by it at all.

 

[Sal1950]

@Mart68 might have slightly exaggerated here, but there really are many devices that take 30–60 seconds just to load a disc, regardless of their age. This happens particularly often with SACD and multi-format players.

Maybe? I noticed some slow loading of BluRay movies and such, but nothing of note with a plain CD.
It's been a long time since I bothered with SACDs, I avoided them like a plague for a lot of years now. When I was forced to, it was one rip and done since the software was developed to rip them with the older Sony players.
YMMV

 

[El_Duderino]

I’ve heard this before, and certainly my Marantz SA-14s1 takes seemingly forever to load. But why can’t they program it to look for CD first, then only look for the rest if a CD isn't found? Surely that’s not beyond the ability of a typical manufacturer?

I don't know either. But my guess is that they want to avoid the extra costs (for development, hardware, software) since the CD format is not that high on their agenda. For example not too long ago they often used standard PC drives (mainly dvd drives) in hifi CD players, which were really slow (and inexpensive) in comparison.

 

[Ste_S]

I don't know either. But my guess is that they want to avoid the extra costs (for development, hardware, software) since the CD format is not that high on their agenda. For example not too long ago they often used standard PC drives (mainly dvd drives) in hifi CD players, which were really slow (and inexpensive) in comparison.

It’s been interesting watching the Spare Time Repair YouTube channel. Seemingly most transports used in CD players are pretty cheap, which makes ‘high-end’ CD players even more laughable.

 

[Nopiano]

It’s been interesting watching the Spare Time Repair YouTube channel. Seemingly most transports used in CD players are pretty cheap, which makes ‘high-end’ CD players even more laughable.

Yes, the same mechanism in the Tascam CD-200 (reviewed here at ASR) is found in the Primare CD35 and the ATC CDA2 mk2 players, as well as some of Teac’s own models. In the UK the Tascam is about £240 but the others are ten times the price.

Interestingly, I own the Tascam and the ATC, and the mechanisms do operate differently, so ATC must program their own control software.

 

[rcstevensonaz]

It is perfectly reasonable to spend a bit more money on a handsome drive featuring more sophisticated build quality; however, the performance delivered by the Tascam CD-200 and the SMSL PL200T is virtually impossible to surpass.

One key difference is that the SMSL is a professional audio device that can accept external clock input. The TASCAM CD-200 claims that title of "professional", but I can't connect the digital output from a CD-200 to a professional audio interface (e.g., RME USB Digiface, UCX II, etc.).

Separate question: any other CDs or DVD players that can accept an external master clock — preferably S/PDIF clock synch.

[Update and correction: my comment above implied the CD-200 is not professional-level audio gear, which was an unfair and incorrect statement. It is high quality, is used in professional environments, and has a high reputation. My comment was only meant to contrast that the CD-200 does not include one feature (slave clocking) that is usually only found in professional audio equipment. But that isn't a negative against the TASCAM CD-200; just a product feature I personally wish it had for my context].

 

[Roland68]

One key difference is that the SMSL is a professional audio device that can accept external clock input. The TASCAM CD-200 claims that title of "professional", but I can't connect the digital output from a CD-200 to a professional audio interface (e.g., RME USB Digiface, UCX II, etc.).

Separate question: any other CDs or DVD players that can accept an external master clock — preferably S/PDIF clock synch.

The SMSL is far from being a piece of professional audio equipment, and you won't find it in that category.
Why can't you connect the Tascam CD-200's digital outputs to these devices? That would be strange, given that the CD-200 has been one of the best-selling players in the studio sector for 12 years.

 

[rcstevensonaz]

Why can't you connect the Tascam CD-200's digital outputs to these devices? That would be strange, given that the CD-200 has been one of the best-selling players in the studio sector for 12 years.

Yea, seemed strange to me as well. But it has to do with clock source for digital connections ... and why my RME USB Digiface is collecting dust since I didn't know before hand about the issue of master vs. slave clocking.

You can connect the CD-200 to a professional audio interface under the following scenarios:

• Analog output (using that DAC within the CD-200) connected via unbalanced interconnect at +2V RMS
• Digital output provided the TASCAM can serve as the master clock in the audio chain — the downstream audio interface will in turn be a slave to the clock source from the CD player.

What can't happen:

• Connect digitally to an audio interface, where the audio interface is the master clock — and thus the internal clock on the digital input devices has to a slave mode.

In the end, this is only an issue when you want to connect multiple digital inputs to the audio interface. But on the SMSL, the Word Clock BNC opens up that possibility (e.g., if connecting into a UCX II).

 

[Roland68]

Yea, seemed strange to me as well. But it has to do with clock source for digital connections ... and why my RME USB Digiface is collecting dust since I didn't know before hand about the issue of master vs. slave clocking.

You can connect the CD-200 to a professional audio interface under the following scenarios:

• Analog output (using that DAC within the CD-200) connected via unbalanced interconnect at +2V RMS
• Digital output provided the TASCAM can serve as the master clock in the audio chain — the downstream audio interface will in turn be a slave to the clock source from the CD player.

What can't happen:

• Connect digitally to an audio interface, where the audio interface is the master clock — and thus the internal clock on the digital input devices has to a slave mode.

In the end, this is only an issue when you want to connect multiple digital inputs to the audio interface. But on the SMSL, the Word Clock BNC opens up that possibility (e.g., if connecting into a UCX II).

I think you’re conflating "audiophile" information (which usually makes no real difference) with the actual world of professional studios.
They might exist, but I’ve never seen a CD player or transport with a Word Clock input in any studio. What would be the point, anyway?
The goal is to synchronize devices that are actually part of the production process.
If you really want to use CD audio for that purpose, there are units like the Tascam CD-200SB, which allows you to output the digital data as uncompressed WAV files.
It also makes absolutely no difference if you connect a CD player via S/PDIF to a device that is part of a synchronized chain; that’s actually standard practice in studios.

You should really take a close look at @NTTY’s review of the Tascam CD-200, as well as the review of the G1 clock, where he tests standard CD players with a DAC that is synchronized to the G1 clock.
Whether you want to keep chasing that rabbit down the hole is up to you.

By the way, I own two Tascam CD-200 units myself—one of them is the SB model, for the reasons mentioned. I only own the PL200T because I have limited space on my desk. I also have a few high-end 10 MHz clocks, but it wouldn't occur to me to connect them to the PL200T; it would just be a gimmick.

 

[Mart68]

My CD transport has input for an external clock, the clock costs £1600. A few people have asked me if I will get one, I just laugh.

A pal who is an 'everything matters' type bought a clock and waxed lyrical about the benefits. Intrigued I went over and we hooked up so we could instantly switch the clock in and out. He hadn't tried that previously.

We listened for a while without clock, then switched it in. Absolutely nothing. No difference at all. We went back and forth for a while. He didn't say anything but I could tell he was astonished.

After a while I said 'Mate, this is doing nothing.' He replied that he thought the soundstage was a little wider with the clock in. We could have blind tested that but I thought it would be adding insult to injury. He later sold the clock.

 

[thekingbeyond]

I have been enjoying the Tascam CD-200 since I asked for advice with this thread, I would say it is a very good, quick and quiet transport into the audiolab 9000q via coaxial digital out and I prefer this method of connection to the analogue out, what a good deal this player is.

 

[Roland68]

My CD transport has input for an external clock, the clock costs £1600. A few people have asked me if I will get one, I just laugh.

A pal who is an 'everything matters' type bought a clock and waxed lyrical about the benefits. Intrigued I went over and we hooked up so we could instantly switch the clock in and out. He hadn't tried that previously.

We listened for a while without clock, then switched it in. Absolutely nothing. No difference at all. We went back and forth for a while. He didn't say anything but I could tell he was astonished.

After a while I said 'Mate, this is doing nothing.' He replied that he thought the soundstage was a little wider with the clock in. We could have blind tested that but I thought it would be adding insult to injury. He later sold the clock.

These are the same experiences we’ve had over the past few years during blind tests with various people—including audiophiles—who brought along their own equipment and external clocks. In these blind tests, no one could distinguish between times when the clocks were active and when they weren't—even with systems costing well over €50,000. Dismay and endless excuses from the owners.

 

[rcstevensonaz]

I think you’re conflating "audiophile" information (which usually makes no real difference) with the actual world of professional studios.

Ouch, really? That hurts.

But to be fair, I took a shortcut using "professional studio" when I really meant equipment designed for professional audio environments — e.g., RME Digiface USB or UCX II. Contrast that with my other gear that falls in the category of consumer audio — WiiM Pro, Sqeezebox, WaxWing, Oppo DVD player, D10 Balanced (USB to S/PDIF), etc.

My context is a home office where I want all devices mixed rather than individually source selected (which mutes all other devices). That single preference has forced me into the "professional audio" category since there are no "consumer audio" products that do mixing instead of switching. As a result, in my current environment, all source audio mixing is done in the analog domain on an Ashly LX-308B. Yet all of my source media is arriving in digital format (including turntable since I have a Waxwing)... so that means an added DAC in front of the stereo mixer for every single source device.

My Audio Nirvana (windmill?) is to eliminate the intermediate DA/AD cycle, and instead just mix the audio in the digital realm. Please see this (naive) image from my post RME Digiface USB as a digital mixer & router for my home office stereo setup? (How close can I get?).

In that context, the CD-200 can only connect via analog since it cannot be a slaved clock. And that works fine — the added AD/DA isn't affecting the sound. Whereas the SMSL could connect digitally if I was using the UCX II.

Anyway, I don't post the above here to solve my issue — that was already addressed well addressed in the other thread. Rather, to provide the reason behind my interest in a CD player with source clock input since it could help simplify my audio chain... not esoteric audiophoolery as you and others accused me of.

 

[rcstevensonaz]

In these blind tests, no one could distinguish between times when the clocks were active and when they weren't—even with systems costing well over €50,000. Dismay and endless excuses from the owners.

So 100% true.

And yet absolutely irrelevant to my post. (And frankly, hard not to take offense at you for the implications behind what you and others posted) [Strike that.. I reacted too quickly... on that message, @Roland68's response was to the post about someone's friend who thought hooking their audio device up to an external clock source would improve the sound. Which, unsurprisingly, it doesn't.]

 

[Ste_S]

These are the same experiences we’ve had over the past few years during blind tests with various people—including audiophiles—who brought along their own equipment and external clocks. In these blind tests, no one could distinguish between times when the clocks were active and when they weren't—even with systems costing well over €50,000. Dismay and endless excuses from the owners.

But the jitter!?!

 

[Mart68]

So 100% true.

And yet absolutely irrelevant to my post. (And frankly, hard not to take offense at you for the implications behind what you and others posted) [Strike that.. I reacted too quickly... on that message, @Roland68's response was to the post about someone's friend who thought hooking their audio device up to an external clock source would improve the sound. Which, unsurprisingly, it doesn't.]

Just to clarify, my post was in no way an implication of you. I understood what you were asking. The discussion of external clocks just reminded me of that incident.

 

[Roland68]

Ouch, really? That hurts.

But to be fair, I took a shortcut using "professional studio" when I really meant equipment designed for professional audio environments — e.g., RME Digiface USB or UCX II. Contrast that with my other gear that falls in the category of consumer audio — WiiM Pro, Sqeezebox, WaxWing, Oppo DVD player, D10 Balanced (USB to S/PDIF), etc.

My context is a home office where I want all devices mixed rather than individually source selected (which mutes all other devices). That single preference has forced me into the "professional audio" category since there are no "consumer audio" products that do mixing instead of switching. As a result, in my current environment, all source audio mixing is done in the analog domain on an Ashly LX-308B. Yet all of my source media is arriving in digital format (including turntable since I have a Waxwing)... so that means an added DAC in front of the stereo mixer for every single source device.

My Audio Nirvana (windmill?) is to eliminate the intermediate DA/AD cycle, and instead just mix the audio in the digital realm. Please see this (naive) image from my post RME Digiface USB as a digital mixer & router for my home office stereo setup? (How close can I get?).

In that context, the CD-200 can only connect via analog since it cannot be a slaved clock. And that works fine — the added AD/DA isn't affecting the sound. Whereas the SMSL could connect digitally if I was using the UCX II.

Anyway, I don't post the above here to solve my issue — that was already addressed well addressed in the other thread. Rather, to provide the reason behind my interest in a CD player with source clock input since it could help simplify my audio chain... not esoteric audiophoolery as you and others accused me of.

You didn't say anything at all about the workaround, and in 99% of cases, it amounts to the same thing.
Furthermore, there are virtually no CD players with word clock inputs in the studio sector, simply because they aren't required for studio operations.

You aren't alone in having this requirement, but it is very uncommon on a smaller scale. This type of requirement is more typical of modern broadcast and live sound environments. However, the devices capable of handling this are very expensive—such as the PRODIGY.MP, which features ASRCs on every AES input to synchronize all digital inputs and align them to the same sample rate.

In an affordable price range, such things are usually very fiddly and involve a great deal of effort.

 

[rcstevensonaz]

Just to clarify, my post was in no way an implication of you. I understood what you were asking. The discussion of external clocks just reminded me of that incident.

Yea, I realized that once my morning coffee kicked in.

Also, great story! It had not occurred to me that perhaps SMSL includes the external clock input because people think it improves the sound quality.

 

[rcstevensonaz]

You didn't say anything at all about the workaround, and in 99% of cases, it amounts to the same thing.

My work around — which includes a rack mounted analog stereo mixer and a separate DAC (D10Bs, SU-2s) per input source — works great as far as sound quality goes. But, that is a lot of kit that I'd love to eliminate! If only there was a way to take multiple digital source into a digital (rather than analog) mixer.

Furthermore, there are virtually no CD players with word clock inputs in the studio sector, simply because they aren't required for studio operations.
You aren't alone in having this requirement, but it is very uncommon on a smaller scale. This type of requirement is more typical of modern broadcast and live sound environments.

I would consider broadcast, live sound environments, etc. in the category of professional audio. And as you allude, those environments where they are injecting audio from digital sources just do it via analog out to their audio interfaces. Because there are no other alternatives. And also, I suspect they already have plenty of analog mixing ports available anyway.

However, the devices capable of handling this are very expensive—such as the PRODIGY.MP, which features ASRCs on every AES input to synchronize all digital inputs and align them to the same sample rate.

Thanks for the reference to PRODIGY.MP. Clearly out of my price range, but one of the only devices I've seen on the market that will do ASRC on multiple ports.

The ADI-2 Pro series does offer 1 ASRC input. But after that it is a large step up to multiple ASRC inputs.

So for now, I'm back to chasing at windmills off in the distance.